| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has mandated, as of April 7, 2008, that authors who have received NIH funding for their research must make that research publicly accessible in PubMed Central, NIH’s free digital archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature.
For more background on the policy and the specific terms of the law requiring it, please review the information provided on NIH’s Public Access Web site.
Manuscripts accepted for publication before April 7, 2008, are not subject to the mandate that authors must deposit their NIH-funded manuscripts into PubMed Central. For any manuscripts accepted after that date, ASHA hereby assures NIH-funded authors that they have ASHA’s full permission to comply with the NIH requirements, subject to the following conditions:
ASHA’s copyright transfer agreement is being revised to reflect current policy. Also, ASHA’s Publications Board is continuing to discuss their policy on this issue and NIH is inviting further comment. Check back to this site for possible changes in the future.
Although some publishers deposit articles to PubMed Central on behalf of authors, ASHA is at this time having authors make their own deposits. Important information is conveyed during the process, so authors are better served by making the deposit and receiving the information they will need for later use.
Once you have submitted your manuscript, you will receive an NIHMS ID number. PubMed Central will then perform quality assurance checks and create a retrieval record for the manuscript. At that time, your PubMed Central ID (PMCID) number will be available.
As of May 25, 2008, you will need to cite the PMCID or the NIHMS ID, or both, when citing your manuscript in NIH applications, proposals, or progress reports. Consult the NIH FAQ for more information.
The widespread move to online publishing has brought forth many opportunities, but also many challenges, when it comes to the dissemination of scholarly research.
In developing policies on postpublication changes to journal articles, ASHA has taken into account the needs of the many users of the journals—researchers, librarians, archivists, and indexers—in addition to those of the authors and editors, to articulate policies that can be uniformly implemented and enduring.
Scholarly publishing has a long history, so ASHA was able to rely heavily on the recommendations contained in the following documents from major organizations in the industry:
As the nature of scholarly publishing continues to evolve, ASHA will monitor trends, keep abreast of the policies of its fellow publishers, and regularly review the recommendations of organizations such as those listed above. Adjustments will inevitably be made; however, preservation of the accuracy, reliability, and permanence of the scholarly record shall remain a core principle of ASHA’s policies.
One downside of the long and varied history of scholarly publishing is the variety of terms used to refer to the various types of actions that are taken to correct mistakes or address more serious publishing matters. With that in mind, ASHA has settled on the below terms for the various types of corrections.
Erratum: a correction of any sort. ASHA has in the past made a distinction between a correction notice and an erratum. The former was for errors made by the production office but not of a substantive nature, and the latter was for substantive errors made by either the author or the production office. In keeping with guidelines from National Library of Medicine, this distinction is no longer made by ASHA. An error is an error, and its correction will take the form of an erratum regardless of its source or characteristics.
Retraction: rejection or disavowal of published work because of fraud, plagiarism, ethical breaches, or other such scientific malfeasance, or because one’s work is rendered invalid as a result of the malfeasance or misconduct of another author’s work on which one’s article is based. A retraction containing explanatory information is published and bidirectionally linked, and the original article is clearly and permanently marked as having been retracted (e.g., by a watermark on each page).
Removal: deletion of content from the scholarly record (extremely rare). Bibliographic information will remain a part of the scholarly record, but the actual article content will be removed in the event of a court order to do so; if there is a clear risk of legal liability to the author, publisher, or copyright holder; or if the content poses a danger to the public.
ASHA created hypothetical examples that address ASHA’s stance on corrections and retractions in the journals. These scenarios provide more specific information on procedures to be followed, as applicable.
| Subscriptions | Search | Journal Policies | Rights and Permissions |
| All ASHA Journals | Special Interest Division Publications | The ASHA Leader | |
| About ASHA | For ASHA Members | ASHA Home | |